how emotional they are. one thing is for sure, they are listening and watching and hold their officials accountable as we go through 2012. i hope you enjoyed th u.s.nd israel. i'm shannon bream. thanks for watching and have a captioned by closed captioning services, inc. >> chris: i'm chris wallace. there are ten states and more than 400 delegates in play. the countdown to super tuesday. with primaries and caucuses across the country, we'll have presidential candidate rick santorum where he needs to win to regain the lead in the republican race. rick santorum a "fox news sunday" exclusive. then, president obama and israeli prime minister netanyahu get ready to discuss what to do about iran. we'll explore how to keep that rogue nation from going nuclear with two key senators, republican lindsey graham and

richard blumeen shall. >> the syrian government attacks its own citizens. we will ask our sunday panel how the president should handle both hot spots and our power player of the week gets ready for march madness all right now on "fox news sunday." >> chris: and hello again from fox news in washington. while all eyes are on super tuesday, washington state held its caucuses sat results. mitt romney won with 38%. ron paul second at 25%. rick santorum was close behind at 24. newt gingrich was last. on tuesday, ten states are up with more delegates at state than all of the contests combined up until now. joining us from tennessee one of the states that votes on super tuesday is former senator rick santorum and senator, welcome back to "fox news sunday." >> thank you, chris. good to be with you.

>> chris: good to be with you, sir. ohio is generally agreed the biggest prize on super tuesday and would seem to be tailor made for you. bleblue collar, manufacturing, lots of rural areas. big evangelical vote. don't you have to win there, sir? >> we will do well, there, i believe that. it is a a tough state for us only because of the fact that with the money disadvantage. but we have got a great grass roots campaign. we are hanging in there and we feel very confident that we are going to do well. as you know, it is always harder when you have got two conservative candidates out there running in the race as we have seen in washington and we have seen in some of the other states. we have the andty romney vote if you will. both gingrich and i are out there slugging away. we need to show that we are the best candidate to go head to head and i think if you look at all of the races it is governor romney and me one or two or in

this case washington congressman paul spent a lot of time out there. we are the ones that are the clear alternative. eventually hopefully this race settles out and we will get a chance to go one on one and once that happens we feel comfortable we will win this thing. >> chris: you raised the question should newt gingrich drop out. >> that is up to him to decide. clearly if you you continue to combine the votes that congressman gingrich and i get we are doing pretty well. in michigan we have won easily had the two votes been combined. that you but you that is a process i think newt has to figure out where he goes after georgia and we are going to see that i think we will do well, here in tennessee. we will do well in oklahoma. i think we will do very well also in ohio and north dakota. and i think we will come in second place in a lot of places, too. again, if you look at where you can fe finish first and good second places again this race narrows to two candidates over time and that is where we have

our opportunity. >> chris: on the other hand because of filing problems you may be ineligible for 18 of ohio's 66 delegates and you are not even on the ballot in virginia which means you have no chance for those 49 delegates. >> right. >> chris: the romney campaign says this is a question of basic competentence and say you flunked. >> well, as you, know the delegates had to be filed in virginia back in early part of december. i will be honest i was out running across the state of iowa and sitting at 2% in the national polls with limited resources. we didn't have the ability to go out. i think it is remarkable candidly if you look at all of the states other than a handful in ohio and in virginia where we weren't the only one that didn't get on the ballot. rick perry didn't get on who had a lot of resources and newt gingrich who had a lot of resources back then didn't get on. we have done amazingly well for

a campaign early on that didn't have a lot of resources to get out and do things and got on a lot of ballots that people thought we wouldn't. i feel good that we are on enough, clearly enough to be able to win in nomination. >> chris: rush limbaugh apologized to the georgetown law student who said that her student health plan should cover birth control but your party is still pushing the issue. in in the senate offered the blunt amendment that said that any insurance company could decide on moral grounds not to offer birth control coverage as part of their health insurance plan. do you really want to be campaigning on contraception in the year 2012? >> well, the blunt amendment was broader than that as you know. it was a conscience clause exception. it was a conscience clause exception that existed prior to when president obama decided that he could impose his values on people of faith when the people of faith believe that

this is a grievous moral wrong. >> chris: but respectfully, sir,, let me just say but the blunt amendment wasn't just talking about catholic institutions or colleges or charities. it was saying any you know, u.s. steel, any company, any insurance company could decide not to offer birth control. >> if there was -- if -- it wasn't about birth control. it was about a moral exception to any type of mandate. it didn't specify birth control. >> chris: including birth control. any treatment. >> this is a conscience clause exception which used to be unanimously agreed to. daniel patrick monahan offered a similar amendment and it was accepted widely. the idea that the government can force people to do things that they believe are moreally wrong is something that at least heretoforewas seen as an jut rage that there would be a separation of church and state you here so much about the left saying we need to separate church and state.

well, how about the separation of church and state when the state wants to force the church and people who are believers into doing something that they don't want to do and as you know in that amendment it said that if people want to object to certain treatments is that the secretary of health could require them to adopt other treatments so it is actually the same. it is not something where people say well, we get out of paying for these things because we don't want to pay for them. where there is clear conscience protections for people of faith the government should not be forcing people to do things that are against their conscience and that has always been a hallmark of america and absolutely anchored in the first amendment. >> senator, this is more than an issue of faith or conscience, religious freedom. you say that you believe that birth control is wrong. take a look. >> many of the christian faith say well, that is okay, contraception is okay.

it is not okay. it is a license to do things in the sexual realm that is counter to what -- how things are supposed to be. >> senator, the centers for disease control say that 99% of women this this country between the ages of 15 and 44 would who have had sexual activity and this includes catholic women they say that 99% of them at some points in their lives have used artificial birth control. are you saying that these women have done something wrong? >> now, when you beliefs that are consistent with the church somehow or another you are out of the mainstream and that to me is a pretty sad situation when you can't have personally held beliefs. the issue is about whether the government can force you to do things that are against your conscience and that is what we

have been talking about on the road. we haven't been talking about my own personal moral beliefs. we have been talking about what the government can do in forcing people to change or violate those beliefs. >> chris: one last question on social issues. you say that churches and faith-based organizations have a big role to play in helping the poor. helping people who are disadvantaged. i want to ask you you about the 2010 tax returns because in them they show that president obama gave 14% of his income to charity. mitt romney gave almost 14%. you gave 1.76%. why so little, sir? >> well, i mean we always need to do better. i was in a situation where we have 7 children and one disabled child who we take care of and she is very, very expensive. we love her and we cherish the opportunity to take care of her but it is an additional

expense. we have to have around the clock care are for her and our insurance company doesn't cover it so i have to cover it. that is one of the things that you have to balance the needs of your immediate family and if you look back in the previous years we did donate more are and it is an area that i need to do better and will do better. >> chris: we look the at your chartable returns i think since 2007 and in every case it was around 2%. >> it was around 3% or 4% in some cases but that is okay. again, we are dealing with a situation in our own family. i have 7 children. during those 4 years we had our little girl and it was a very costly -- she is very costly and again, i'm not making excuse except for the fact that every family goes through periods of times where they have to donate -- dedicate resources to the problems in their own family and taking care of people and that is what we did. >> chris: absolutely. you talk about the cost of education. you caused quite a stir

recently when you criticized president obama's education policy. take a look. >> he once said he wants everybody in america to go to college. what a snob. >> we look back. the president has never said that. this is what he did say in his first address to congress. >> i ask every american to commit to at least one year or more of higher education or career training. it can be a community college or a four year school. vocational training or an apprenticeship. >> chris: the reason i ask, senator, is because we looked back at your 2006 website when you were running for reelection back in 2006 and here is what your campaign put up on your website. rick santorum has supported legislative solutions that provide loans, grants and tax incentives to make higher education more accessible and affordable. question, weren't you then

right where barack obama is now? >> well, all i can tell you is that i support people being able to go to and have the opportunity to go whereever they want to go but i wanted to make sure that we focus not just on four year college degrees and that we understand that there is a lot of different training opportunities for people both as -- in technical schools and going to the military or going to a lot of other places that we need to make sure that we affirm all of those choices. >> chris: but isn't that what the president said as well, sir? >> again, maybe i was reading things that -- i have read some columns where at least it was characterized that the president said we should go to four year colleges. if i was in error in that, you say you haven't found that. i have read that. if it was in error then i agree with the president that we should have options for people to go to a variety of different training options for them.

>> chris: you also say that you were never although you voted for no child left behind you were never before it and in fact you took one for the team. >> no, that is not true. that is not true. i didn't say that. are i said i supported it. and then i said subsequently that i made a mistake. >> chris: but when you said you took one for the team what was that about? >> thi there were things in the bill that i didn't like and there was a huge amount of education spending that i absolutely didn't like and a lot of people didn't like. as you know, about 90% of the senate voted for it because there were things in there that i did like which was the educational testing part and trying to get determination as who how the schools were performing. ultimately what happened with the implementation of the bill and spending which gave me heart burn then and i didn't like then seemed to then become the dominant part of what no child left behind was about and that is why i said that was a mistake in voting for all that spending and government control and over state and local

schools. >> chris: brings knee m me to , sir. i want to go back to the 2006 website. rick santorum supported the no child left behind act which has been the most supportive legislative initiative enhancing. in 2006 you are campaigning based on your support for no child left behind when you found out what it was about and all the spending. >> as i said before, that having the testing was very, very important. and in fact the first part of that when it was implemented what we did see is a lot of testing, a a lot of evidence that came out that our schools were failing and i think that was an important thing to have accomplished subsequently particularly under this president we have seen and later in president bush's term an explosion of education spending which i objected to. >> chris: a couple of final questions. i want to talk about your economic plan. you you would set two tax

rates. 28 and 10%. cut the corporate tax rate in half to 17.5%. start reforming entitlements now, not in ten years and cut spending $5 trillion in five years. the nonpartisan committee for a responsible federal budget says even if you could get all of those things through congress you would end up adding to the deficit largely because of your tax cuts by $4.5 trillion over the next ten years. your response? >> well, this is -- these are these organizations that don't believe that when you reduce taxes that you get more economic growth and i don't accept the economic models that they use. we have seen it in the part when regan and bush particularly regan would make the cuts the kind of dramatic cuts that you are suggesting here you would see a huge spike in growth and more revs coming into the federal government. they basically say if you cut things you get less money period and don't offset the

fact that the economy ising. >> to grow faster. i don't accept the premise of their argument. i think we have seen in the past that cutting taxes does create growth. cutting regulations as we do in the plan, we repeal every single one of obama's regulations that cost over $100 million to the economy which last year alone was 150, just two and a half times of the average under clinton and bush. we will change the entire environment in this country so you will she more economic growth and you will see more revenues as a result. >> chris: thank you so much for coming in today and talking with us. safe travels on the campaign trail, sir. i know you have a bit of a cold. i hope you you feel better and we will see how things go tuesday night. >> appreciate it, chris. >> chris: up next, we will ask two ski senators if it means more sanctions or a military strike. ee

chris president obama and israeli prime minister netanyahu are set to meet monday and the top issue is how to stop iran's nuclear program. joining us are two key members of the senate armed services committee just back from the middle east. republican lindsey graham and democrat richard blumenthal. senators, welcome to both of you. the president and prime minister will be wrestling with two questions. what are the red lines, how far each leader will allow eran to go before giving up on diplomacy and second, how committed is each to a military strike in iran crosses the red line. senator graham, what does president obama need to say to prime minister netanyahu to reassure him?

>> that i'm committed to stopping iran from getting nuclear weapon not only in words but in deeds. that if necessary we will use military force and they need a common definition of what change, what kind of change would be acceptable on iran's part. >> chris: meaning the red line, how far they are willing to allow iran to go. >> there needs to be a common definition conveyed privately to iran so they know what they need to do. >> chris: does president obama need to go further than he has so far in reassuring the israelis. >> he needs to give a more specific and muscular content. to all options are on the table to say that containment is not an option. that a nuclear armed iran for all the reasons that he stated so powerfully in the interview that he did recently with jeff goldberg is unacceptable because it would destablize the middle east and create access for terrorists to nuclear

armaments and it would make the middle east a nuclear tender box and that is the passion and specificity he needs to bring to the conversation. >> chris: on the other hand does netanyahu need to give tougher sanctions imposed. tougher measures against iran's central bank. does he need to give those more time to work before he launches a unilateral military strike. >> israel's interests are its just as our naturalural interests have to be the guiding principle. that cooperation, strategic and intelligence have never been stronger between these two allies and the prime minister of israel has to recognize that the united states has its own

interests but in this case they are aligned with israel's. >> chris: but there is a disagreement here. there is, senator graham a disappearment about how far are they should allow iran to go and at what point a military strike should be triggered. >> there is a difference in capability. >> chris: and difference in the assessment of the situation. >> an intelligence difference. we have been sanctioning iran seriously i think in an effective way for about the last six months. they keep enriching. they have 3,000-kilograms of enriched uranium. here is the situation in israel. their military capability is less than hours. there will come a point where the sites get hardened and they are being hardened. if they want to built a power plant for peaceful purposes they are going at it in an odd way. put the behavior and rhetoric together, with israel you can't

lose control of our own destiny. they want sanctions to work wele give them time but when the iranians get to the point our military capability is not sufficient to stop their program that is the red line for us and we have a different point militarily than they do and there is the conflict. >> chris: and how should that be resolve? resolved on watt israeli capabilities are and at the point at which they have to strike or should they be willing to rely on the united states? >> we should not be talking about our differences. we should be talking with our commonnities. the president's statement on not contain nuclear armed iran is great. you have to understand this. the israeli government and people will not lose control of their own destiny period. that is the end of the discussion from their point of view. sanctions could work. have not worked yet. but there will come a point in time where they will lose control of their destiny militarily and they are not going to let that happen and we should acknowledge it and say that is okay with us. >> chris: so that, in other

words, when they say we will no longer have the capability to take out the nuclear program we are not going to rely on the u.s. we are going to do it yourselves. >> we should understand that is a reasonable position for the israelis to take and support that position and hope we never get there and hope that our assurances will enable them to understand how we will be their ally and how we will stop a nuclear armed iran. how we will not tolerate as a matter of our national interest, not israeli interests. the focus is so much on restraining the israelis but it ought to be on making sure that our commonnallity of interest is served by a strong united states policy that convinces the iranians that they are crippling their economy and brutalizing their people and the united states at the end of the day is not going to accept that nuclear armed iran. >> chris: let's turn to afghanistan and the blowback to the burning of several korans

in that country in the last several weeks. in recent days six u.s. servicemen killed by our afghan partners and the reaction from some leading republicans and conservatives has beenme problt you have to deal with and say, you know, you are going to have to figure out how to live your own miserable life. >> it has gotten to the point where w why are we there. bring them home and the hell with the place over there. >> senator graham, are newt gingrich and rush limbaugh wrong? >> he know why we are there. general allen will be here in two weeks to tell the congress why we are there. there are 30 million afghans it breaks your heart when six soldiers are killed for an inadvertent burning of a religious document. they left their homes and their families to help the afghans. we do have strong allies

afghanistan so don't let this snapshot ruin the strategic performance. if we leave and it falls back in the taliban hands and al-qaeda reemerges we will pay a heavy price. h history will not judge us by what we left or the day we left behind. the key to this is the strategic partnership agreement telling the taliban and pakistanis we will have a followon military force and the taliban will never come backing. what we do after 2014 and the way we do it determines our long-term security interests. >> chris: same basic question to you. when afghan police are turning their weapons knot on the taliban p but on u.s. soldiers when you see leading conservatives saying it is time to go to the exits is it time to get out of afghanistan? >> we will be getting out of afghanistan hopefully when that strategic partnership. >> chris: in two and a half years. >> on the time table and with the strategy that general allen and the commanders and the troops there are following. >> chris: so you wouldn't speed

up? >> i think if we can speed up and accelerate that withdrawal with the kind of strategic partnership that we are building and with special operators continuing to make the progress in taking out targets and turning over that function to the afghans that certainly is a goal to be pursued. but let's remember, chris, very importantly three tremendous problems in afghanistan. economic weakness, safe havens, corruption in the government. beyond this incident which is tragic, absolutely tragic for both sides really there is an important point here that we need to stick to this strategy and overcome this incident. >> chris: finally because we are running out o of time and i want to talk about one last trouble spot and that is syria and the slaughter of the opposition of civilians in syria tips unabated. senator graham, what should the u.s. do. should we start arming the

opposition? and what do we do about assad? >> i think the opposition needs military support. you could probably do it from the arab league. working with senator blew men that will calling on the arab nations to call assad -- international outlaw because he is. let him know know he is an international outlaw. >> you said arm him in. >> i think the arab league would be a good vehicle to provide military assistance to the opposition resistance. and consider a no drive fly zone quickly. >> you are saying what we did in libya? >> i think that could serve as well. >> secretary blumen that will? >> secretary clinton is doing a good job of bringing together the world community and arab league in terms of support. the aid can we technical assistances.

communications. humanitarian aid. financial support and if possible arms that would go incorrectly. there are means to do it. it should be under the auspices of the international community as secretary clenton is endeavoring to do and this resolution will send an important message and iran, on israel, on syria we are bipartisan and bipartisanship is breaking out as i saw in this great trip that we took with senator mccain. there is very strong support for the kinds of initiatives that we saw in libya and libya is a model for how we can aid rebels but let me emphasize, chris. no american troops, none. no american troops on the ground. >> direct aid that will bolster that opposition. >> chris: senator blumenthal and graham, thank you both so much for coming in today and we will see what comes out of the

key obama/netanyahu meeting tomorrow. >> coming upnthe sunday panel weighs in on what israel and the u.s. should@

they can continue to advance their nuclear program and get to the nuclear finish line by running the clock, running up the clock so to

speak. and i think the international community should not fall into this trap. >> chris: israeli prime minister netanyahu on his way to monday's summit with president obama warning the west not to get bogged down in meaningless talks with the iranians. and it is time now for our sunday group. bill kristol of the weekly standard. jeff the new york times national political correspondent. kimberly straussle from the "wall street journal" and fox news political analyst juan williams. a delicate meeting that we will have tomorrow in the oval office between president obama and prime minister netanyahu. bill, how far does each man have to go? what a dose each man have to do to try to reassure the other that they are on the same page on iran? >> i think they are not quite on the same page on iran and i'm not sure that is because of the personalities of president obama and prime minister netanyahu. i think issuesual feels iran this regime having nuclear weapons or having even the capacity to break out to nuclear weapons is a threat

that israel cannot live with. the u.s. point of view is well, as long as they don't we weaponnize we can take care of it later. crises and the capacity that senator graham was talking about. they do not have the bunker busters that we have got so they would have to take out iran in an earlier stage. >> the u.s. position is we can wait longer and, of course, the u.s. has more capability and we will know when the breakout is going to happen. the israeli position is look, it would be great if you could wait longer but we are israel and we are sitter here and this is regime is committed to destroying us and we can't live with that. >> chris: seems the biggest risk here is that obama and netanyahu come out of this meeting with daylight between them and distance and that only emboldens iran to go further.

>> the president and his administration spent the last couple of months undermining israel and put them in an inumbrater position now. if the president is going come out and seemed to have a taken a more forward position this week and sounded more hawkish on this. if the belief is he is saying that solely to rein israel but not because it actually means that the first people to understand that are the iranians themselves. he has to come to not only some sort of agreement with mr. netanyahu but has to sound like he means what he says. >> chris: juan? >> president obama never distanced himself from israel. >> chris: what about on the settlements. >> that has been american policy. the problem is his relationship with netanyahu and the strong militaristic talk that has come from netanyahu in the past. the president said this week he

doesn't bluff and he said it is unacceptable for iran to have nuclear weapons and also reiterated he has taken risks with military action when necessary so as he goes before apac, as he goes today and speaks to netanyahu tomorrow i think the message is i'm working with israel. you should not act unilaterally in a way that would endanger not only world peace but the world economy. and that the world in fact looks to stand with israel. >> chris: and kim, the problem with that is? >> the administration has undermined israel and it has leaked that its goal is to stop israel from engainling on iran and that has diminished israel's leverage in the region. >> i don't think it is to stop israel. i think it is to say to israel that the united states is israel's prime ally. the super power in the world and is willing to help. bill kristol makes the point the u.s. can take more time because it has greater military capacity than israel but it has to quiet israel's fears that i

think could in the absence of real steps by iran to develop nuclear weapons lead us into a situation where the united states or israel acts and in fact we find that iran has no weapons of mass destruction. >> chris: there is also a big political component in all this. one referred to apac which is the america israel public affairs committee. big group, thousands are folks who are here in town and the president is going to speak to them today. all the republican candidates speak to them on tuesday. and they are all the president and the republicans going to say we are the best friend of israel. >> no question. and this president has had a hard time sort of with this group of republicans and democratic voters who are jewish as well because he for several reasons they have been skeptical of him and his administration. i look for him when goes to apac to speak to do more of a hardline and i think that he

has as juan said that he was signaling his willingness to be tough on military issues. of course, he has several things to point to that he has done over the last three years. i think he will give a tougher speech today. he is going to win over some of the voters at the end of the day. the rebuttal is going to come from the three republican candidates, mitt romney and newt gingrich and rick santorum on tuesday morning when they speak to the group i apac. the bomb ticks is not as important as the policy -- the politics is not as important as the policy in the middle east. >> chris: i want to turn to the tragic killing of six u.s. soldiers by afghans in uniform. by our supposed partners. and as i discussed with the senators, there is a growing movement not a ground swell but you see people like newt gingrich and rush limbaugh talking about rushing to the exits. bill, how sensitive a moment is this now for the question of

how committed the u.s. is going to be in afghanistan? >> i think it is an awfully sensitive moment and we will see if general allen two weeks from now, when testifies can convince people that in the big picture we are on a reasonable path and that president obama hasn't weakened us with the announced drawdown and the little incidents are just incidents and don't reflect the broader pattern. >> chris: little incidents. >> even for me who has been a hawk and i do think it would be disasterrous if we pulled out precipitously and lead to bad things and all that. the last killing of the the soldiers we were there i think at the actual navy forward operating base or outpost where the two soldiers were killed by the afghans right near omar's hometown and at the time they had taken casualties clearing the caria, the third brigade,

extremely impres impressive. it was a good news story when we were there. very impressive. to think the idea that a couple of afghan turned on american soldiers and killed them is hard to keep up one's support for the war. >> chris: we have to take a break here. when we come back we will discuss the campaign. what is at stake on super tuesday and the politic [ male announcer ] let's level the playing field. take the privileged investing tools of wall street and make them simple, intuitive, and available to all. distill all that data. make information instinctual, visual. introducing trade architect, td ameritrade's empowering web-based trading platform. take control of your portfolio today. trade commission-free for 60 days, and we'll throw in up to $600 when you open an account.

trade commission-free for 60 days, (car horn) paying with your smartphone instead of cash... (phone rings) that's a step forward. with chase quickpay, you can send money directly to anyone's checking account.

i guess he's a kicker... again, again! oh, no you don't! take a step forward and chase what matters. [ inhales, exhales ] [ announcer ] cigarettes are not just dangerous when they're smoked. [ rat squeaking ] they're dangerous long after. cigarette butts are toxic. they release chemicals that poison our water... and harm wildlife. and millions... are polluting our environment. [ sniffing ] [ seagulls squawking ]

iit is just right now with our economy in distress and jobs so badly needed and incomes having gone down we need a president who knows economy to fix the economy. >> the other candidate running

here competing against me in ohio is uniquely unqualified to make the case against barack obama and to the american people. >> chris: mitt romney and rick santorum on saturday making their case in ohio, a crucial state for both on super tuesday. we are back now with the panel. while we have been on the air, another poll has come out in the state of ohio and it shows that rick santorum is holding on to a slim lead. this is the marist poll, 34% to 32 but romney continues to eat away at a santorum lead which was in double digits just before the michigan primary. jeff, how is super tuesday shaping up and a what do you think of the possibility that it will really sort out who is going to win the nomination? >> i don't think mathematically it is going to sort this out because it is still not enough delegates. politically it will start to sort things out. it is sort of all about ohio. apologies to all of the other states voting like oklahoma

which actually has more delegates than massachusetts and virginia but ohio sort of has become the bellwether here which is a little bit of a challenge for the romney campaign. are if they don't win, ohio, he is going to have to continue to make his argument that he can win over the social conservatives than others. but it has become a delegate fight and the romney campaign has huge advantages because they have a full slate of delegates in ohio and a full slate of delegates in virginia and he is on the ballot in virginia. i'm still not sure that romney has inspired enthusiasm. are if you talk to voters who see him they are still not thrilled at the idea. on tuesday it is a huge step toward solving this but will not be resolved at least mathematically for weeks to come. >> chris: kim, let's talk about ohio and you know as you can see from that poll this is really up for grabs very much so. what does it mean if romney wins and as we see even a "ugly

win" is a win. what does it mean if romney wins and if santorum wins? >> i think more importantly what does it mean in santorum loses. one of the reasons ohio matters it is a rematch of michigan but you without necessarily the strengths that mr. romney had in michigan. ohio is not his home state. also more evangelical voters. the base that has propelled mr. santorum. if he cannot win in this big blue industrial heartland there is a worry for his campaign that he looks as though he is not really the contender that he was and whether or not mr. romney runs away with it from there. >> chris: add one other to the equation which is newt gingrich. what does he have to do to remain a critical candidate. first of all, does he have to win georgia and whether that be enough? >> he has to win georgia. i don't see any future for him without winning georgia and even if he wins georgia the

question is exactly what does the future hold beyond there. i don't think he is favored in any state right now. you are looking at places that have some of that social conservative element but rick santorum is looking at places like oklahoma, tennessee and then beyond when you come to alabama, you know, and some of the other southern states. again, santorum has the momentum at this moment. i'm not sure what the future holds for gingrich in that regard. overall i would say the difference for me coming and watching out of michigan with ohio, chris, is that mitt romney looks to me to be the inevitable nominee but looks to be after the month of february a weaker nominee who is spending money, you know, he is really using up some of h his donors and secondly driving up his negatives with independents and women voters. >> chris: bill, wrap this part of the panel up. your thoughts about super tuesday? >> ohio is key. i mean think of it this way. if santorum wins ohio, he will win i think oklahoma and

tennessee. he will have won three of the six big states. romney will presumably win two, massachusetts his home state and virginia where santorum and gingrich aren't on the ballot. gingrich will win georgia. if romney wins two of the big six ones that is a big difference from winning three of six with ohio. and winning, ohio, and michigan back to back would put romney in a strong position. >> chris: turn to the discussion i had with rick santorum about birth control. jeff, when president obama stumbled over this question of a mandate that religious institution, not churches but catholic hospitals and catholic charities had to provide healthcare coverage that included birth control and then had to take it back, republicans seemed to have the upper hand and seemed to be casting this as the issue of religious freedom and intrusive government. it seems that the democrats have begun in some circles to

turn it around and make it more an issue about women's health and womens rights. who has the upper hand on this issue right now? >> i think that democrats probably do have the upper hand on this issue because of women voters who are absolutely the top demographic in this presidential campaign in the general election. >> the democrats were worried because they think the white house completely mishandled this whole thing in the from the beginning. for any one who thinks this was a strategy written out to unfold like this i don't think some people who work in the west wing agree with that. it has turnd that way because of all the voices from the outside. particularly a rush limbaugh. i'm not sure how lasting this. >> is, i think women voters who i talked to in ohio and pennsylvania and other places are still motivated by the economy and other concerns but this is definitely sort of taken issue away from the economy and put it on social issues. and it is not helpful for the republican party. i'm not sure if it is frozen in time but right now, democrats i think have the upper hand.

>> chris: kim? >> i could think it is one of the things republicans have to embrace and take on because i think it goes beyond women's health issues. it is is also getting to the heart of obama care this particular discussion. what the democrats are arguing cleverly is if a company refuses to pay for this particular product for you that you are somehow being denied access in toto to that particular product. this is a a big standard because there are all kinds of health performances and drugs that we have never expected to be included in our insurance and you want dental implants instead of crowns. maybe brand name drugs instead of generics. if the democrats establish this that somehow companies are obliged to pay for this and you are denying americans these things unless they are paid for that is a big problem for republicans going forward in the healthcare debate. >> chris: for instance before coming on today i checked with the women here at fox news and turns out that fox news health coverage does cover, there is a

copay but it does cover contraception. and, you know, i don't know that there is a teeming political debate about dental implants. >> well, the point being -- >> chris: when it comes to contraception the idea and we are not talking about religious institutions. u.s. steel as i said. fox news. any company could simply decide we are not going to offer that. an insurance company could decide that has no tie. >> the alternative that you have government mandate what you view to be basic healthcare or more than basic healthcare to for everyone and everyone pays for that and that is behind the rising costs in healthcare is that we say done has to have a package and has to have these 100 things in it. take away consumer choice and raise the prices for everyone and that is one of the aspects of this fight. >> chris: juan, 30 seconds, your thought about how this plays politically? >> i think it exploded in the face of republicans. this is why i was coming back

to you when i said earlier the last few weeks have been terrible for the republican brand and for the man who looks like the inevitable nominee, mitt romney because women, they have just an and tag antagoniz. >> i had a dental implant this week and had foregotten about it until you two had to go on and on about dental implants. >> chris: does it feel okay? >> until a minutety go it was fine. i think republicans can win an argument on religious liberty. >> chris: we will leave it there. thank you panel and we will talk in panel plus about your dental implants. see you next week. i promise we will not talk about bill's dental implants where we pick up on the discussion on the website fox news sunday .com. and spick sure t make sure to n twitter.

up next, our power player of the wee with the capital one cash rewards card you get a 50% annual bonus. and everyone likes 50% more cash -- well, except her. no! but, i'm about to change that. ♪ every little baby wants 50% more cash... ♪ phhht! fine, you try. [ strings breaking, wood splintering ] ha ha. [ male announcer ] the capital one cash rewards card. the card for people who want 50% more cash. ♪ what's in your wallet? ♪ what's in your...your...

... >> chris: it's that time of year march madness, who folks raise millions of man-hours of work following the ncaa tournament. right in middle is the power player of the week.

>> it's where you understand what it's going to take to win. >> john thompson is head basketball coach at georgetown which is about to run for the national championship. but does he what does he think about march madness? >> it's fun for the kids and fun for us. hopefully we'll have success. >> chris: it didn't start as fun. last august, thompson took his team to china and it ended in a brawl fearing for their safety. >> it made this group understand we have to fight for each other. and to protect each other. >> chris: despite the fact it's a young team. georgetown is 22-6 and ranked 11th in the nation. >> polls mean nothing because you have to play the game. >> chris: how far do you think you can go?

>> we can play for three weekends. >> in other words, win the national championship. which brings to us coach's father, john thompson, jr. which won back in 1984. >> chris: when did you know you wanted to be a basketball coach? >> i did not grow up aspiring to follow my dad's footsteps. never grew up thinking i was going to be a coach. >> chris: after playing at princeton, he went into. >> chris: what happened? >> i missed the notion of team. i missed the competitive highs and lows that are associated with athletics. >> chris: he coached four years at princeton and in 2004 with his father looking on, he made the move. >> it's coming home to the great institution at georgetown. >> chris: you have to knew you were going to be compared to your dad? >> i'm used to it.

there are going to are comparisons. that is part of my life. >> chris: he is less confrontational than his father. not as much of a shouter. >> chris: you have extreme attention to detail, control freak? >> that has negatives. it sounds negative. where did you get this from? control freak. >> chris: coach thompson has other things on his mind? >> one big banner up again. that is what we want to do. that is our goal. while you are streifg for it getting another banner out there you have to remember you are helping them grow up. >> chris: georgetown played the final game of the regular season and lost to marquette. the coach takes his team to the big east tournament and then on to march m